The real Mitt Romney, more people should know about him...

[Sukerkin]

Bill, can't see what you wrote because you are a holiday from my eyes at present. But I can hazard a guess.

Your knowledge and understanding of how the financial and real aspects of the economy function is incomplete. As I am English, I am not so entangled with the destructive Democrat/Republican dichotomy that eats away at the foundations of your nation and, to be frank, I am much the same when it comes to the British political dance compared to the economic realities, which are the things that are of interest to me.

The West is sliding into what I term Neo-Feudalism, with vast wealth gathered into a few hands and relative poverty and powerlessness for the rest of the population. Now, it is possible to argue about that in political and moral terms and when I was younger that would have engaged me mightily. But what really matters is the practical outcome of that unsustainable state of affairs and how 'we' can avoid those destructive consequences without throwing out the notions of business and social mobility along the way.

At the end of the day, when an economy becomes unbalanced in such a fashion it stops working - that is the only thing that should concern any of us.

 

[billc]

I enjoy brave individuals who put people on ignore, because they don't have the ability to ignore on their own, or the strength to read a post from someone who annoys them or they disagree with. I have only ignored one or two people, and then shortly reinstated them, and then it was because they were nasty and rude. Here is to the British stiff upper lip, or the lack thereof. Of course, some won't see this post...oh well.

I mean, if I haven't put elder on ignore, how can I respect people who put me on ignore?

In honor of the last post #61, I give you...Monty Python and the Holy Grail...

 

[Cryozombie]

well, I suppose we have gotten used to it, since we are so bain washed about how the rich need tax breaks, right.

The thing is... everyone wants to focus on how the Rich get all these tax breaks while the poor shoulder an unfair burden... but when It comes down to it, Mitt Romney, or Bill Gates, or Bono from U2 who all use LEGAL MEANS to retain their wealth and avoid paying taxes are doing nothing wrong, anymore so than say my Fiancee's brother who is an independant guitar instructor who pays almost no taxes and gets HUGE returns because of... and I hate to use the term, but it's the one everyone bandies about... "Loopholes" in the law that allow him to get CONSIDERABLY more back than he pays into the system. It works both ways, so As far as I am concerned, no matter how you try and justify it it's still just your opinion of what's right and wrong.

Now lets talk about tax breaks for the middle class who shoulder the burden for things like that BILLION dollars in income tax return payouts to aliens (legal and illegal) that the government admits happened, admits was based on widespread fraud, but supposedly refuses to investigate... <--- Far more concerned with this, than either of the two examples I listed above.

 

[Cryozombie]

Bill, can't see what you wrote because you are a holiday from my eyes at present. But I can hazard a guess.

Your knowledge and understanding of how the financial and real aspects of the economy function is incomplete. As I am English, I am not so entangled with the destructive Democrat/Republican dichotomy that eats away at the foundations of your nation and, to be frank, I am much the same when it comes to the British political dance compared to the economic realities, which are the things that are of interest to me.

Suk, this is the funniest thing I have seen all morning: "I have no idea what you said, but you have no idea what you are talking about and are wrong!"

It may well be true, but your post is pure comedy gold.

 

[Sukerkin]

I thank you :bows with a broad grin:.

Sometimes there are things that you can take on trust to be so without even looking, like BillC blaming the Democrats for whooping cough or referencing economists/political 'thinkers' with low credibility but who happen to suit his agenda :lol:.

 

[Tgace]

I thank you :bows with a broad grin:.

Sometimes there are things that you can take on trust to be so without even looking, like BillC blaming the Democrats for whooping cough or referencing economists/political 'thinkers' with low credibility but who happen to suit his agenda :lol:.

Well...at least you know what you are getting. Like FOX news...Id prefer straight up honesty rather than someoene dancing around their agenda pantomiming "impartiality".

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

 

[Big Don]

blaming the Democrats for whooping cough .

There is, since you snarkily mention it, a case to be made for blaming democrats for whooping cough. Here in CA, as well as nationwide, democrats are the ones fighting enforcement of illegal immigration laws. Illegal immigrants have brought whooping cough to the fore again, so much so, that now there are mandatory vaccinations required for admission to school. Whooping cough was nearly non-existent here until just a few years ago...

 

[billc]

They have low credibilty with people who disagree with them and I go to them because they are clear speakers to the side of the argument that I agree with. I site them due to their expertise in their fields, such as Thomas Sowell, Friedrich Hayek (Nobel prize winning economist). Ludwig von mises and on and on...after all, I am a guy on the internet, as is Sukerkin so pointing to known individuals out in the world should carry more weight...wether you agree with them or not...As well, I always list any site or source I get information from so that the reader can make up their own mind. I highlight quotes from the article that I find capture the essence of the whole article...it is up to readers to judge for themselves...

 

[Sukerkin]

Well...at least you know what you are getting. Like FOX news...Id prefer straight up honesty rather than someoene dancing around their agenda pantomiming "impartiality".

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

LOL If you think BillC is being honest then you think differently than me.

Twin Fist was honest and he would listen and understand even when he disagreed with you (well he did with me at any rate). Don is funny and that tempers his political views when the silly game waxes too ludicrous to keep a straight face. BillC, however, despite clearly not being dumb and/or crazy as a box of frogs seeks only to stir up dissent and cause upset - I sometimes think he might actually hold the reverse of the political views that he espouses as he does so well at making people believe that the Republican party causes it's supporters to behave in some pretty peculiar ways.

 

[Sukerkin]

There is, since you snarkily mention it

What's snarky about that? I get the feeling I shall have to look up what the word means in American idiom.

I just credited you publicly with having a sense of the ridiculous - don't make me retract that .

 

[Sukerkin]

Gentlemen, sadly, for now at least, I cannot bear this any more and need a break from it.

I have to turn my eyes away from you aficionados of the American political scene for a time so as to get my own sense of humour back - real life is too stressful as it is without having to take on the added depression of reading what hits the 'pages' here all too frequently.

Bye for now.

 

[crushing]

I kinda visualize it like a monstrous tree, sucking funds up to an expanding canopy. 'Trickle-down' economy my butt - the working class is withering under a profit shadow.

Both major parties advocate some sort of trickle-down economics. One claims that trickle down is best done through a combination of private enterprise and charity and the other tends to prefer trickle down through layers (not unlike your "monstrous tree") of government bureaucracies.

 

[elder999]

The Real Mitt Romney:

The purpose of the Republican convention is to introduce America to the real Mitt Romney. Fortunately, I have spent hours researching this subject. I can provide you with the definitive biography and a unique look into the Byronic soul of the Republican nominee:

Mitt Romney was born on March 12, 1947, in Ohio, Florida, Michigan, Virginia and several other swing states. He emerged, hair first, believing in America, and especially its national parks. He was given the name Mitt, after the Roman god of mutual funds, and launched into the world with the lofty expectation that he would someday become the Arrow shirt man.
Romney was a precocious and gifted child. He uttered his first words (&#8220;I like to fire people&#8221 at age 14 months, made his first gaffe at 15 months and purchased his first nursery school at 24 months. The school, highly leveraged, went under, but Romney made 24 million Jujubes on the deal.

Mitt grew up in a modest family. His father had an auto body shop called the American Motors Corporation, and his mother owned a small piece of land, Brazil. He had several boyhood friends, many of whom owned Nascar franchises, and excelled at school, where his fourth-grade project, &#8220;Inspiring Actuaries I Have Known,&#8221; was widely admired.

:lfao:

(David Brooks is a conservative, and this was a joke......laugh, people-I'm betting the "real Mitt Romney" is...:lfao: )

 

[granfire]

Both major parties advocate some sort of trickle-down economics. One claims that trickle down is best done through a combination of private enterprise and charity and the other tends to prefer trickle down through layers (not unlike your "monstrous tree") of government bureaucracies.

Are they prepared for the Fletcher response?

 

[elder999]

They have low credibilty with people who disagree with them and I go to them because they are clear speakers to the side of the argument that I agree with. ...it is up to readers to judge for themselves...

:lfao:

 

[cdunn]

The Real Mitt Romney:


:lfao:

(David Brooks is a conservative, and this was a joke......laugh, people-I'm betting the "real Mitt Romney" is...:lfao: )

Clearly. As we all know, the "Real Mitt Romney" was never 'born', they just flipped the switch beneath his hair piece to the 'on' position, and now they periodically update his software over Wi-Fi. It's how he can recalculate his positions without cognitive dissonance.

 

[billc]

Well, here are the Romney's tax returns...

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/09/21/revealed-mitt-romneys-tax-returns/

Regarding the newly-filed 2011 Tax Return:
-In 2011, the Romneys paid $1,935,708 in taxes on $13,696,951 in mostly investment income.
-The Romneys&#8217; effective tax rate for 2011 was 14.1%.
-The Romneys donated $4,020,772 to charity in 2011, amounting to nearly 30% of their income.
-The Romneys claimed a deduction for $2.25 million of those charitable contributions. &#8230;
Regarding the PWC letter covering the Romneys&#8217; tax filings over 20 years, from 1990 &#8211; 2009:
-In each year during the entire 20-year period, the Romneys owed both state and federal income taxes.
-Over the entire 20-year period, the average annual effective federal tax rate was 20.20%.
-Over the entire 20-year period, the lowest annual effective federal personal tax rate was 13.66%.
-Over the entire 20-year period, the Romneys gave to charity an average of 13.45% of their adjusted gross income.
-Over the entire 20-year period, the total federal and state taxes owed plus the total charitable donations deducted represented 38.49% of total AGI.
During the 20-year period covered by the PWC letter, Gov. and Mrs. Romney paid 100 percent of the taxes that they owed.
​

So, let&#8217;s just take a second here to process this. Mitt Romney, who is ostensibly uncaring, out-of-touch, and disdainful of poor people, gave more than 13 percent of his income (amounting to millions and millions of dollars) over twenty years to charity, and didn&#8217;t even always take the full tax deduction. (The bastard!) By at least one count, the average effective federal tax rate for Americans is 11 percent &#8212; and Romney&#8217;s average annual rate was 20 percent, alsoamounting to millions and millions of dollars that went into the federal government&#8217;s coffers. He has done nothing wrong or shady, unless you consider being a wildly excellent businessman to be a vice, and the finger-pointers now look pretty darn dumb.

-In 2011, the Romneys paid $1,935,708 in taxes on $13,696,951 in mostly investment income.
-The Romneys&#8217; effective tax rate for 2011 was 14.1%.
-The Romneys donated $4,020,772 to charity in 2011, amounting to nearly 30% of their income.

Almost 2 million dollars in taxes paid and over 4 million dollars given to charity...the Greedy F*****g bastard!!!!!!

Yes, he is a better man than obama...

 

[Sukerkin]

Err, I think you'll find that last there is an opinion that not all share . Even I, whose only care is that another warmonger doesn't end up in the Whitehouse, doesn't see how you can possibly think that the gentleman merits such kudos from yourself.

I can tell you that he is seen in a poor light from far away over here on this side of the Atlantic. An example of the extent to which electing him would lower the stock of America in other developed countries eyes is that in Holland an exit poll was conducted in which voters were asked how they would have voted if they had been taking part in the election due to happen soon in the USA. Care to guess what Obama's share of the vote was? You won't like it (even tho' you can say you don't care as only American's matter) ... 97% for Obama is how the Dutch would vote if they were the American electorate . 2% didn't know and 1% would vote for Romney. Of course that was reported on a programme on BBC radio so it's clearly biased as part of that Leftist conspiracy that encircles the globe :sigh:.

 

[Sukerkin]

Dug a bit deeper and here is some more detail:

Gallup International polls more than 30 nations, Obama wins 29. Romney 1.

WASHINGTON, Sept. 12 (UPI) -- A straw poll of people in more than 30 countries shows U.S. President Barack Obama would win by a landslide if they were allowed to vote in the U.S. election.

Obama's support was highest in Iceland (98 percent); Netherlands, Portugal, Germany (97 percent); Ireland, Denmark (96 percent); Switzerland, France, Finland (95 percent); Italy and Turkey (94 percent); Brazil (93 percent); Romania, Saudi Arabia (91 percent) and Australia (90 percent).

Romney garnered the most support in Israel (65 percent), Pakistan (41 percent), Georgia (36 percent), Macedonia (30 percent), China (29 percent), Lebanon (26 percent), Iraq (20 percent), India (19 percent), Colombia (16 percent), Hong Kong (15 percent) and Cameroon (15 percent).
​

Now of course it is irrelevant to say how people not in a country with an election under way would vote if they could take part. But it is indicative, perhaps, of a lack of connection with the rest of the world on Romney's part - is that a great thing in a President? Or is it no handicap at all?

 

[WC_lun]

Just to update the post from Bill, yes indeed, Mr Romney paid 14.1 percent of his income in taxes ( a lower rate than just about anyone). However, when pointed out that he did not take $200,000 in deductions he could have taken, his campaign responded that he did that on purpose to keep the return in the range that Mr Romney said his taxes were in. Keep in mind, this is Mr Romney's campaign, not any left leaning source. That doesn't mean he has done anything illegal, but this and other behaviour shows that he is willing to finangle his tax returns for political gain. He has also said that any person paying more taxes than they have too should be disqualified as president. Given that statement and what his effective tax rate would have been in 2011 if he hadn't have manipulated it, tells me there are things that would hurt him politically in those tax returns.

Mr Romney sure is having a bad week this week. Does anyone think the debates will help his campaign? Mr Obama is a pretty intelligent man, so I doubt he'll make a huge blunder in the debates, but Romney seems to have a knack for shooting his campaign in the foot. Guess we'll find out.